TELECOM Digest Thu, 2 Feb 95 19:33:00 CST Volume 15 : Issue 74 Inside This Issue: Editor: Patrick A. Townson More Tidbits on AT&T True-Connections (NPA 500) (John Shelton) Panasonic Cellular Phone (James L. Wiley) Re: Hidden Features of Panasonic Phones (Steve Samler) Re: Neighborhood Phone Books (Wm. Randolph Franklin) Caller ID Block Fails (Wm. Randolph Franklin) Multiple ESN's per NAM (Update) (Chris J. Cartwright) 503 NPA Split? (Dan McDonald) New Area Code For Oregon (Paul Buder) Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Alan Shen) Re: 28.8k bps Modem (David Hayes) Re: 28.8k bps Modem (David Sacerdote) Re: 28.8k bps Modem (John Dearing) Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Eric Nelson) Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Scott Lorditch) Re: 28.8k bps Modem (Steve Midgley) Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Mark Peacock) Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Greg Monti) Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is (Carl Moore) TELECOM Digest is an electronic journal devoted mostly but not exclusively to telecommunications topics. It is circulated anywhere there is email, in addition to various telecom forums on a variety of public service systems and networks including Compuserve and America On Line. It is also gatewayed to Usenet where it appears as the moderated newsgroup 'comp.dcom.telecom'. Subscriptions are available to qualified organizations and individual readers. Write and tell us how you qualify: * telecom-request@eecs.nwu.edu * The Digest is edited, published and compilation-copyrighted by Patrick Townson of Skokie, Illinois USA. You can reach us by postal mail, fax or phone at: 9457-D Niles Center Road Skokie, IL USA 60076 Phone: 708-329-0571 Fax: 708-329-0572 ** Article submission address only: telecom@eecs.nwu.edu ** Our archives are located at lcs.mit.edu and are available by using anonymous ftp. The archives can also be accessed using our email information service. For a copy of a helpful file explaining how to use the information service, just ask. ********************************************************************** *** * TELECOM Digest is partially funded by a grant from the * * International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in Geneva, Switzerland * * under the aegis of its Telecom Information Exchange Services (TIES) * * project. Views expressed herein should not be construed as represent-* * ing views of the ITU. * ********************************************************************** *** Additionally, the Digest is funded by gifts from generous readers such as yourself who provide funding in amounts deemed appropriate. Your help is important and appreciated. A suggested donation of twenty dollars per year per reader is considered appropriate. See our address above. All opinions expressed herein are deemed to be those of the author. Any organizations listed are for identification purposes only and messages should not be considered any official expression by the organization. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- From: jls280c@crusher.dukepower.com (John Shelton) Subject: More Tidbits on AT&T True-Connections (NPA 500) Date: 1 Feb 1995 19:25:54 GMT Organization: dukepower I talked with AT&T yesterday and learned: More exchanges have been added to their set. You can now request numbers from: 288 346 367 437 442 443 445 446 447 448 449 488 673 674 675 677 679 My favorite, 500.FOR.EVER, was already taken. Even though the install and vanity fees are waived during this sign-up period, if one requests a *change* (better vanity number) they will impose the $10 install and $25 vanity fees. AT&T claimed that as of yesterday (31-Jan-95) "All" LECs had agreed to provide access, so I should be able to use this from anywhere in continental US. (I'll be pleased if it gets worked out in three months.) A friend who has AT&T, but lives in an Alltel neighborhood says AT&T cannot provide her this service. Neither AT&T nor Alltel could explain. Yes, her AT&T calls *are* billed on the local phone bill. For the deluxe plans which offer sequencing, I'm told you can program the number of rings to try for each number. That's very important. My service will be turned on 15-Feb-95. John [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Like heck it will be turned on February 15! AT&T told me mine would be working January 21, then they said January 24. After that date passed, the due date was January 31 ... you guessed it; it still is not working as of today, Thursday, February 2 in the evening. I call them they say call Ameritech; I call Ameritech and am told to call AT&T. I call the Illinois Commerce Commission; they claim no knowledge of any 'agreement' reached between AT&T and the telcos. Now for the past couple days they won't return my calls. Supposedly my number is working if the caller knows to dial 1-800-CALL-ATT for starters, just like the cumbersome 700 service, but when I tried it that does not work either. I did not sign up for this service so my callers could hunt down a pay phone which allows 800 calls so they can punch in all those extra digits, even if that part of it did work, which it appears not to. Just now I called AT&T again about it; this time I got a woman who first said calls to 1-500 were not going through but 0-500 should be working 'just fine'. She put me on hold awhile and came back to report she had talked to 'the specialist' and was told 'everything was working fine' for Ameritech customers. Silly bunch of people! I told her to cancel my service and whenever they get their act together to give me a call back and I will think again if I need the service or not. PAT] ------------------------------ From: wileyjl@ada1.elan.af.mil (James L. Wiley) Subject: Panasonic Cellular Phone Date: 1 Feb 1995 17:02:49 GMT Organization: Air Force Flight Test Center I am looking for a owner's manual for a Panasonic Cellular Phone model EF-6110EA. Also any modifications anyone knows about for this Phone. Where is a good place to get accessories -- batteries, cords, etc. Thanks, James L. Wiley Wileyjl@ada1.elan.af.mil ------------------------------ Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 11:59:01 EST From: Steve Samler Subject: Re: Hidden Features on Panasonic Phones I don't know about the hidden features, but I have one of these that seems to be able to turn itself off. The answering machine is left on in the morning and often is off when I come home. I suspect that there is some hidden feature that turns off the phone. Maybe if you call and press # or * (thinking it is a voice mail system) it turns off. ------------------------------ From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) Subject: Re: Neighborhood Phone Books. Caller ID block fails. Date: 02 Feb 1995 02:31:36 GMT Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA Reply-To: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) In article on Tue, 24 Jan 1995 11:13:54 EST, PAT says: > ... There are about thirty 'neighborhood' books, with their > own yellow pages in the back of the book. These are just > subsets of the larger book, extracted by address groupings > within a given area of the city, and all published by telco. NYNEX extracts by exchange, which makes the neighborhood directories so incomplete as to be useless. I live in Loudonville, but have phone 482-xxxx since the Loudonville prefix, 456, is full (I guess). 482 is mostly Albany, and the Loudonville neighborhood directory omits me, even tho the big white pages give my address as Loudonville, and give my Loudonville zip code. I once complained to Nynex about being omitted, and they said that since my phone was logically in Albany, I'd have to pay to be included in the Loudonville directory. Maybe I could have protested, but life's too short. Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261 ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA More info: (1) finger -l wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (2) http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/homepages/wrf ------------------------------ From: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) Subject: Caller ID Block Fails Date: 02 Feb 1995 02:31:36 GMT Organization: ECSE Dept, Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy, NY, 12180 USA Reply-To: wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (Wm. Randolph U Franklin) Nynex just admitted that 500 people who have caller ID block, are, in fact, having their phone numbers transmitted. First, they denied that this was happening, then they said that only one person (a private detective) was affected, then they 'fessed up. Wm. Randolph Franklin, wrf@ecse.rpi.edu, (518) 276-6077; Fax: -6261 ECSE Dept., 6026 JEC, Rensselaer Polytechnic Inst, Troy NY, 12180 USA More info: (1) finger -l wrf@ecse.rpi.edu (2) http://www.ecse.rpi.edu/homepages/wrf [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Did the report say if they are all on the same exchange, or how the problem came up and if it has been fixed? PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 11:18:00 EST From: Chris J. Cartwright Subject: Multiple ESN's per NAM (Update) I posted a few weeks ago about Cell One in MD (SID-00013) offering FlexPhone to their customers. To recap *it is* multiple ESN's per NAM. Up to three ESN's can have the same NAM. The cost is your regular service for one phone plus $18 for two NAMs, or plus $30 for three. The service _seems_ ;) to work as follows; The phones cannot call each other even if they are in different cells. Roaming is supposed to be disabled on all but the phone with the primary ESN. This is almost true, when I used the second ESN in roam every other call was blocked with a message that said you would have to use a credit card or third party billing to place a call. If I pressed send again (same number dialed) the call would go through. I'm not sure of this is a function of the cell system you are roaming in or if the information from your home system is getting confused. If calls are placed in the same cell at the same time by both phones one of the phones will get a fast busy. No calls can be made from the other phone while the first is in a call. CellONE says that calls can be made from seperate cells at the same time but reccomends against it since they aren't sure what will happen if both phones wander into the same cell at the same time (to be fair this came from a salesman since the tech folks seem to be hidden away fairly well). I haven't had a chance to check this one out but as soon as I figure out how to be in two places at once. I haven't seen a bill for this but I'm wondering if I should argue the fact since my secondary *can't* roam those calls shouldn't be billable. If anyone has questions I'd be happy to test things out if you can resonably describe your test case. E-mail is preferred and will get a faster response. Chris Cartwright, Technical Engineer Voice 301.295.0809 Mail dsc3cjc@imc220.med.navy.mil C-serve 71614,2441 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: The tech people are always hidden away where no one can reach them conveniently; not without being perfectly obnoxious and very pushy with the front line people. As for 'being two places at one time' you don't have to be. Wherever you are, just take both (all) of your cell phones and turn them on. Have them all sitting there then from a separate line dial the cellphone number. Now, you will have both phones in the same cell at one time obviously, and can test the results for your- self. Also, use the cell phones to dial out two or more calls at the same time. Since they are all with you, they'll all be in the same cell, right? Please report the results here. PAT] ------------------------------ From: mcdonald@teleport.com (Dan McDonald) Subject: 503 NPA Split Planned? Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 10:38:16 PDT Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 I've heard rumors of a split in the 503 area code (Oregon). Can anyone confirm or deny these rumors? Daniel J. McDonald home: mcdonald@teleport.com Telecom Designer work: 2397@idchq.attmail.com Industrial Design Corporation pots: 1.503.653.6919 [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: A recent newspaper article seems to indicate this is true. See the next article in this issue. PAT] ------------------------------ From: paulb@teleport.com (Paul Buder) Subject: New Area Code For Oregon Date: 02 Feb 1995 09:41:20 -0800 Organization: Teleport - Portland's Public Access (503) 220-1016 According to the {Oregonian}, Portland's daily newspaper, Oregon will be moving from one area code to two in 1996. The PUC is soliciting comments from the telephone companies as to whether it should be a geographical split or whether simply new lines will end up in the new area code (blechh!). The article says US West, the Baby Bell here, hasn't responded yet. paulb@teleport.COM Not affiliated with teleport. ------------------------------ From: Alan Shen Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 00:26:40 -0800 Organization: University of Washington On Wed, 25 Jan 1995, Victor Hu wrote: > 1. Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or > 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression? 28,800 bps uncompressed. RAW SPEED. > 2. What kinds of host supports 28.8K? I only connect up to my > university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max. It's not dependent on the host, but if the other modem supports that speed. To connect at 28.8Kbps, the other modem must support it too. Here at our university's computer, we can only connect at 14.4, but supposedly, they are installing 28.8 V.34's by this summer. > 3. What is the speed of fax machines? 99% of the stand-alone fax machines out there (the non-fax/modems) only support speeds of up to 9600bps. And actually, that's plenty of power for Group III. Others, very few though, can go up to 14,400bps on the standard V.17. Most fax-modems support that speed. > My impression of my new modem: > 1. The Supra has a nice display (external version for the PC) that > shows the mode of transmission. I have a PM14400FXSA with a 12-character LCD. Sure beats LEDs doesn't it! > 2. However, I found that it required a different initialization string > than that suggested as default for modems that are Hayes compatible. Some modems work okay with just a standard init string and a simple ATZ. I finally figured out one that works with 300bps - 14,400bps. Do a little tweaking and some experimenting. You'll figure one out too soon! If you have any more question, feel free to e-mail me. (kermee@u.washington.edu) Daniel Kao ------------------------------ From: dhayes@onramp.net (David Hayes) Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem Date: 02 Feb 1995 17:41:21 GMT Organization: On-Ramp; Individual Internet Connections In article , vhu@AGSM.UCLA.EDU says: > 1. Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or > 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression? The modem is capable of sending 28.8k without compression. On top of this, the standard V.42bis compression scheme can achieve up to 4:1 compression, so you could theoretically get up to 115k bits/second. I observe 2:1 to be more common, though, so expect about the same throughput as an uncompressed 56kbps leased line. > 2. What kinds of host supports 28.8K? I only connect up to my > university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max. Anything that's got a fast async serial port. Your university's computer probably could handle it, but the modems they use limit you to 9.6 (standard V.32). This is a common situation. To test your modem, try some of the bulletin board systems in your area. Many of them upgrade more quickly than large university sites, úÿ because they have fewer modems to upgrade. Note that you can even try BBS's on which you do not have a login. All you need to see is that your modem will connect. >3. What is the speed of fax machines? CCITT (now renamed ITU.T) standard Group III fax machines run at 9600 bps. David Hayes dhayes@onramp.net ------------------------------ From: DSacerdo@world.std.com (David Sacerdote) Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem Organization: The World Public Access UNIX, Brookline, MA Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 18:10:49 GMT If you purchased a modem which supports the v.34 standard AND are using a computer to modem communications speed which is faster than 28800bps it will actually travel across the wire at 28800bps, assuming no line noise, no error correction, and no compression. I am also assuming that you are connecting to another modem which supports the V.34 standard, or whatever proprietary standard your modem supports. David Sacerdote ------------------------------ From: jdearing@netaxs.com (John Dearing) Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem Date: 02 Feb 1995 05:25:43 GMT Organization: Netaxs Internet BBS and Shell Accounts Victor Hu (vhu@AGSM.UCLA.EDU) wrote: > 1. Is the bps across the twisted pair wire actually running at 28.8 or > 14.4 when 28.8 is invoked? Or is it just data compression? The modem-to-modem (across the wire) communications rate will be up to 28.8Kbps assuming a clean connection. > 2. What kinds of host supports 28.8K? I only connect up to my > university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max. Let me get this straight ... you only use the modem to connect to the University computer system which only has 9600bps modems. Then why buy a 28.8Kbps modem if the other end can't do 28.8Kbps?? Even a 14.4Kbps modem would have been overkill. A 28.8Kbps modem will only connect at 28.8Kbps with another 28.8Kbps modem. Unless/until the University decides to upgrade their modems, you won't see any improvement. : 3. What is the speed of fax machines? Almost all real fax machines are 9600 bps. There are a few fax machines that support fax at 14.4. If you connect to another fax modem that also supports 14.4K then both faxmodems will negotiate a higher speed. Expect most of your faxes to go through at 9600 bps. John Dearing jdearing@netaxs.com ------------------------------ From: mater@PrimeNet.Com (Eric Nelson) Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem Date: Wed, 1 Feb 1995 20:31:10 MST Organization: Primenet A 28.8 kbps will transmit 28.8 kbps if the line can support the modulation used to get that 28.8k rate. Data compression can be used on uncompressed files to increase the throughput, but this has little value when transferring compressed files. Additionally, the other end must have a 28.8k capable modem. My internet provider does have 28.8k connection. ------------------------------ From: gryphon@j51.com (Scott Lorditch) Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem Date: 02 Feb 1995 14:08:03 -0500 Organization: TZ-Link, a public-access online community in Nyack, NY. You should set your PC's serial port to at least 56K when using a 28.8 modem to get the effect of compression as well. I often set mine to 115 kbps. > 2. What kinds of host supports 28.8K? I only connect up to my > university's computer which only runs at 9.6K max. Many Internet service providers offer SLIP and PPP service using 28.8 modems attached to their terminal servers. Every modem manufacturer uses a slightly different superset of the "standard" Hayes command set. Scott Lorditch Senior Network Architect Pepsi Cola North America ScottL@Pepsi.Com ------------------------------ From: tailored@netcom.com (Steve Midgley) Subject: Re: 28.8k bps Modem Organization: NETCOM On-line Communication Services (408 261-4700 guest) Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 20:09:02 GMT With sheepish apologies to the moderator and readers, I amend my previous post. I must have sleeping sitting down :-) V.32 is not the protocol spec for 14.4 modems. It's V.42. Apologies, apologies. Steve Midgley Tailored Solutions ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 09:03:50 -0600 From: mpeacock@dttus.com Subject: Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is Greg Monti writes: > The story then says, cryptically, that the plan also would "create > 'permissive and mandatory dialing arrangements' that wouldn't > jeopardize new competitors". And that the City of Chicago "opposed > the stipulation on ground that eleven-digit rather than seven-digit > dialing requirement was 'onerous' and might predetermine similar fate > for 312 area code where customers are used to seven-digit intraLATA > calls." Greg's adjective "cryptically" is very apt. What the story does not make clear is that, under the ICC proposal, the combined 708/630 NPA area would go to *mandatory* 11-digit dialing in September 1996. This is because the 630 code would overlay the 708 geographic area for both landline and wireless service. The very real example is: You move to a new house and request service; your phone number is 630-NXX-XXXX while your neighbor's number is 708-NXX-XXXX. The city of Chicago is opposed because they believe this ruling will set a precedent for when the 312 NPA again runs low on numbers. By the way, this is not a done deal. The proposed plan is the recommendation of the ICC case worker. The full ICC will consider the recommendation in February. Given the noise being raised over mandatory 11-digit dialing, there may be some significant changes in the future. Mark Peacock Deloitte & Touche Management Consulting Detroit, Michigan [TELECOM Digest Editor's Note: Area 312 Chicago is quite unlikely to run low on numbers anytime soon. So many large businesses and industries -- the type of companies which would use large blocks of numbers or even entire prefixes for their centrex, etc -- have moved out of town, there are lots of spare numbers. 708 is a different matter. It is quite crowded. PAT] ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Feb 1995 9:57:21 EST From: Greg Monti Subject: Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is Thanks to David W. Tamkin , we have a better interpretation of one of the proposed Chicagoland dialing plans. A proposal on the table is for mandatory eleven-digit dialing within one's own area code as of the autumn of 1996. This is to please the Gods of Dialing Parity. Seven digit dialing *between* NPAs was *not* proposed. Greg Monti, Tech Mgr, FISPO, Distribution Division National Public Radio Phone: +1 202 414-3343 635 Massachusetts Av NW Fax: +1 202 414-3036 Washington, DC 20001-3753 Internet: gmonti@npr.org ------------------------------ Date: Thu, 02 Feb 95 16:49:45 GMT From: Carl Moore Subject: Re: Chicago 630 Plan - Such As It Is 630, as you have heard, is to be used for overlay of area codes 312 and 708. But I have also seen 630 in use as a prefix in downtown Chicago. Here is one such use: Bach's Bookstore, 209 N. Wabash, Chicago, IL 60601, tel. 312-630-9113. ------------------------------ End of TELECOM Digest V15 #74 *****************************